Little something for 300
#2
10-26-2012, 09:24 AM
It's obvious that IPS doesn't know how to mount a parachute - I mean, what do they know about cars at all?? It's not like they've ever built a 6-sec IRS car or anything...
#3
10-26-2012, 10:18 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: MPLS, MN USA
Age: 63
Posts: 5,710
Rep Power: 464 
Lol !!
Clearly improper mounting height idiocy. Doh !! How did this sneak by the 300 Engineering department. 300. The over/under is that you are a VIPER Guy...
Clearly improper mounting height idiocy. Doh !! How did this sneak by the 300 Engineering department. 300. The over/under is that you are a VIPER Guy...
Last edited by WOODTSTER; 10-26-2012 at 10:22 AM. Reason: spelling
#4
10-26-2012, 12:14 PM
Golly gee Mullet, you sure got me on that one!
Whew, my head is spinning
Gosh darn, what do I say to that???????? You are just the Sherlock Holmes of parachute deployment!
Hmmm, Let's see.
There are several factors going on here where I feel I can impart some wisdom to a person like yourself so you can get a better idea of the physics involved in the phenomenon you are observing.
Plato's cave shadows are making your ego write checks your limited understanding cannot cash!
1. A drag parachute is a different kind of application than a Mile or Bonneville parachute.
2. A drag chute is a bit larger and is designed to exert more deceleration G's than a Bonneville chute. It is designed to stop the car in a short shut down distance and characteristically has a shorter tether.
3. A mile/Bonneville chute is sized and designed differently to not exert as many deceleration G's to be either used as the initial slow-down chute to get the car from 250-300 down to a slower speed more gently for a longer shut down or as a pre-cursor to the second chute that will exert higher G's to stop the car more quickly if necessary once some of the speed is scrubbed off. This chute also has a longer tether that minimizes the unsettling on the car from side to side parachute movement which increases stability. The shorter tether with greater drag(deceleration drag if you will) will want to wag the back end of the car from side to side more than the lower deceleration coefficient bonneville chute with the longer tether.
With this being said, and having seen the mounting point in pics looking to be pretty close to the center of gravity for what I have seen for other Corvettes, I do think the rear tires lifting 1.5-2" off the ground upon deployment would indicate the parachute design specs are incorrect for this particular Corvette's weight, speed and weight distribution.
I am sure you have seen the videos of this car with the hood off. It is a pretty radical setup placing some fairly large and heavy turbos ahead of the front axles. This, to me would make the rear of the car easier to lift especially with a parachute of improper specifications.
I will put this in terms that even a nutswinger like yourself and many others who do not want to embrace technical explanation:
It is a no-no to have the rear tires to lift off the ground no matter what.
So either the parachute tether point is too LOW(thank you Audibull for reminding me what I posted previously), or the parachute is incorrectly designed for the application.
I would recommend calling Stroud Safety and having Bob build them a custom chute to more exact specifications for this Corvette's speed, weight and weight distribution. I do not know what the specs are of the current chute, but I am sure Bob Stroud could figure out a way to get the car to stop and not lift the rear of the car.
With all this being said, if you still wish to reference cars whose rear end's lift off the ground upon chute deployment as the paragon of parachute mounting and proper chute design excellence, then be my guest!
You can either be scientific, or take part in "Monkey see, Monkey do". The choice is up to you
Hope this helps!
Swing hard my friend, swing hard!
Whew, my head is spinning
Gosh darn, what do I say to that???????? You are just the Sherlock Holmes of parachute deployment!
Hmmm, Let's see.
There are several factors going on here where I feel I can impart some wisdom to a person like yourself so you can get a better idea of the physics involved in the phenomenon you are observing.
Plato's cave shadows are making your ego write checks your limited understanding cannot cash!
1. A drag parachute is a different kind of application than a Mile or Bonneville parachute.
2. A drag chute is a bit larger and is designed to exert more deceleration G's than a Bonneville chute. It is designed to stop the car in a short shut down distance and characteristically has a shorter tether.
3. A mile/Bonneville chute is sized and designed differently to not exert as many deceleration G's to be either used as the initial slow-down chute to get the car from 250-300 down to a slower speed more gently for a longer shut down or as a pre-cursor to the second chute that will exert higher G's to stop the car more quickly if necessary once some of the speed is scrubbed off. This chute also has a longer tether that minimizes the unsettling on the car from side to side parachute movement which increases stability. The shorter tether with greater drag(deceleration drag if you will) will want to wag the back end of the car from side to side more than the lower deceleration coefficient bonneville chute with the longer tether.
With this being said, and having seen the mounting point in pics looking to be pretty close to the center of gravity for what I have seen for other Corvettes, I do think the rear tires lifting 1.5-2" off the ground upon deployment would indicate the parachute design specs are incorrect for this particular Corvette's weight, speed and weight distribution.
I am sure you have seen the videos of this car with the hood off. It is a pretty radical setup placing some fairly large and heavy turbos ahead of the front axles. This, to me would make the rear of the car easier to lift especially with a parachute of improper specifications.
I will put this in terms that even a nutswinger like yourself and many others who do not want to embrace technical explanation:
It is a no-no to have the rear tires to lift off the ground no matter what.
So either the parachute tether point is too LOW(thank you Audibull for reminding me what I posted previously), or the parachute is incorrectly designed for the application.
I would recommend calling Stroud Safety and having Bob build them a custom chute to more exact specifications for this Corvette's speed, weight and weight distribution. I do not know what the specs are of the current chute, but I am sure Bob Stroud could figure out a way to get the car to stop and not lift the rear of the car.
With all this being said, if you still wish to reference cars whose rear end's lift off the ground upon chute deployment as the paragon of parachute mounting and proper chute design excellence, then be my guest!
You can either be scientific, or take part in "Monkey see, Monkey do". The choice is up to you
Hope this helps!
Originally Posted by mullet
I do not always swing from my tuners' nuts, but when I do, I prefer (Insert brand of Kool-Aid here)!
Last edited by 300; 10-28-2012 at 01:26 PM. Reason: Audibull pointed out a mistake in my post contradicting my previous posts on the subject matter
#5
10-26-2012, 12:25 PM
#7
10-26-2012, 12:57 PM
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Houston Texas
Posts: 860
Rep Power: 91
lol at 300. Just posted that because I knew you would write up something long winded about it (I didn't read what you wrote nor do I know squat about chute installation).
Trending Topics
#11
10-26-2012, 02:39 PM
Registered User
